responding to some of the comments to this feature: just because someone has a problem w/ a review or an article, that doesn't make him/her a troll. i'm sure some complainers actually believe these are legitimate complaints. that said, some of these same complainers really need to think about what they say, before they say it. e.g., the complaint that IGN reviewers copy and paste. it's pretty obvious they do it because, as explained in the OP, certain parts of the reviews are interchangeable, such as story and gameplay, and it would be a stupid, inefficient waste-of-time to retype those parts.

I really think ps3 fanboys are retarted fools, has crysis 2 been better on ps 3, this ign reviewer would have been praised like a god.
In fact i have a ps 3 and a 360, ps 3 exclusives are good but are really overhyped by those stupid fanboys. frankly speaking Gow 3 was deceptive as compared to gow 1&2. killzone 2 was meh, weak campaign, slightly above average graphics. mgs 4 is a good game, but dated now. uncharted 2 was very good, this game is very polished, but i have appreciated drake's fortune more, not because of the graphics but because there was a better plot in the storyline in my opinion. And yeah heavy rain was outstanding.
U know i appreciate games for their real values not because what others think about it.
Ps 3 fanboys, you are making yourselves ugly and ridiculous go back troll in your holes. WE DONT WANT TO KNOW YOUR STUPID OPINIONS. CRYSIS 2 on 360 is the best graphics on consoles, there is no denial about it.

I'm all for IGN communicating with the community, but seeking out easily refutable comments and singling out members is a low move. You're not defending your reputation by posting comebacks. You're just stooping to their level.

@ EVERY ONE: I was passing Crysis 2 on super soldier and after a long battle I qauit the game when it saved in a building that would soon be attacked, but when I tried to play the same level again it froze once I clicked x to get in the game except for the music. My question is if this has happened to anyone and if you know how to get it running again because I don't want to pass the game again just for it to happen to me again?

@yt_788100
ps3 fanboys and xbox360 fanboys are equally ridiculous. These are two great consoles. One that is more feature packed (ps3), one that is easier to use with friends (xbox360), one that has better exclusives (ps3), one that has better multiplats (xbox360). If you can afford them both you should get them both.

One thing is certain thought... this is not the best graphical game on consoles. Please check out Digital Foundry and The Lens of Truth for a true graphical analysis.

People need to stop bitching...if you don't like the reviews on IGN then WHY do you come here and read them over and over... I personally agree with most of the reviews, probably because I am the same kind of gamer as many of the editors...but not everyone is the same! The one question I did have is IGN says the PS3 version is a lower resolution but as I understand it the console versions are 720p native and upconverted...

How I think ign should review a game is that they should have somebody who is a fan of a certain genre do the review. Not some journalist like everyone at ign, or someone who plays only a different genre. You don't want someone to post a review for a first person shooter if that person is not even a fan of that genre. Why would you assign a person who maybe a huge MMORPG fan and have no interest in FPS games. I strongly believe that IGN will never know what they want in a video game as with each review coming out, they get more picky and point out all the little flaws in the game and turn them into a bigger problem than what they really are. I Hope you guys at IGN are reading this. And if you guys at IGN say you guys are big fans of every genre, bullshit.

Ya thats the liberal view......as if IGN is singling out anyone. They are picking a variety of comments which are usually ignorant and repetative outbursts without any thought or research that has been followed through upon.

I'm all for it. The bloggers in this case mean well most of the time but its an all too common thing and its the only way you learn in life. Some of them are down right stupid and is what happens when impulsively stupid people breed...lol..yes.

You say these comments are too easy to "comeback" on. Then they shouldn't have posted for godsake. Nothing worse then people who make general comments that are always at least half wrong or horribly formed.....Or....We can go the other way around....When people take what someone has written, doesn't process it at all correctly, then makes a dumb ass comment about it.

I could care less weather that one kid bought Killzone instead of Crysis 2......he could leave that comment out completely and then he can do edit everything he wrote before that.

If I was IGN I'd do the same thing. I'd get a little tired of stupid people. They aren't insulting them. Just correcting them. You don't have to make stupid ppl look stupid; they do that all by themselves while the other stupid ppl agree with them and keep them going.

I still enjoy reading some of those bloggers comments because it is entertaining to say the least although I do wish there were a lot less of them.

i beat this game on supersoldier and it was extremely easy. i honestly think i only died a couple o times. the key is to pretty much cloak the entire time and only kill the people you have to. so it doesnt really matter that the checkpoints are far appart because you shouldn't be dying all that much

Come on man. Be a good game critic, and don't sink to their level. You are a critic, and no matter what you print, you will get flamed by somebody just because of that. But the thing is, you are a professional,and you're not supposed to sink down to their level by printing it. All this will do is just make more people flame you over this article, and the cycle begins anew.

And also, with your handling of the PS3's Crysis graphics issues, I think that surely you must know that gamers are going to want the best version of the game. When you state that the best version is on 360, then that is going to affect real world game sales. But then...you keep the scores the same, so that if someone At Sony calls you on it, you can say that the scores were the same across all platforms. Personally, I think that if you notice a downgrade in the visuals of a game, when compared to other platforms of the same generation, that should always affect the score of the game for that platform.

At least now I understand why you think the 360 version of crysis 2 is the best looking game on console. But let me ask you this...

With the numerous glitches, the many graphical flaws such as foliage and tree branches, doors, windows...the fact that the blood looks cartoony and so does the smoke the comes from big explosions, on top of the fact that there is no doubt that facial animations and character animations and water effects are better in KZ3...my question I put to you is this, did you bother to take these into consideration?

Because from my experience looking at both games...and honestly, to put it bluntly, this is just a fact of the matter at hand...KZ3 does more better than crysis 2. Crysis 2 on 360 looks amazing...and I agree that the lighting and how big the areas are make for an impressive game...but regardless, everything has to be taken into consideration...including the inconsistencies within crysis 2.

Of course, that's just my opinion on the matter. But I think it warrants looking into or at least acknowledgment.

haha the reviewer has been right every time. If you choose to attack someone over their work then at least don't do it because you are annoyed they didn't lick up to YOUR choice of console or because of their personal opinions.
Thanks ign for the write-backs though it cool to see.

Not very many companies or organizations are willing to burn the people who come on and basically just rant without reason. For a company or organization to do it takes a lot of balls. I am amazed that IGN did this.

Your comment is also incoherent and grammatically incorrect. You're just stating your opinion but you're forgetting the facts. Crysis 2 is graphically superior than any other game. The technical specs, resolution, and overall quality is clear evidence of that.

Don't go off to your retarded fanboy sites and compare a Crysis 2 Beta vs a Killzone 3 demo. If you didn't know, the Crysis 2 Beta had more bugs and glitches than you can put your fingers to, so that argument and comparison is INVALID.

Until I see Killzone render a whole island filled with vegetation, with wind physics, soft and volumetric particles, hdr and color correction, sub surface scattering, no texture streaming, destructible physics and hires textures, (not to mention 1080p resolution) Killzone will never be superior. Static low poly square enviroments =/= fully dynamic enviroments like Crysis. Zoom into a texture in the Alien Ship from Crysis with a sniper rifle, and it's more detailed then Killzone 3's textures when stared at normally.

Now ask yourself, with the CryEngine 3 pushing its limits to the next-generation, would these developers dare to make their sequel graphically inferior than their first game? No, they just lowered a few specs and physics in order to sustain itself on the consoles but they advanced everything else in lightning, spec particles, resolution, etc., and it inevitably turned out to look better on the 360. The CryEngine is the most powerful engine in existence, and if you argue with that, you're in utter denial.

Go choke yourself IGN XBOX Fanboys!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And yes TouchTheCloud Killzone looks more like a war rather the over the top Crysis so yes I believe its superior but thats only my opinion but dont start analysing the game i respect your opinion but dont play the expert. Did you play KZ in 3D LED TV and then talk and it has split screen gampaign too.

Until I see Killzone render a whole island filled with vegetation, with wind physics, soft and volumetric particles, hdr and color correction, sub surface scattering, no texture streaming, destructible physics and hires textures, (not to mention 1080p resolution) Killzone will never be superior. Static low poly square enviroments =/= fully dynamic enviroments like Crysis. Zoom into a texture in the Alien Ship from Crysis with a sniper rifle, and it's more detailed then Killzone 3's textures when stared at normally.

Now ask yourself, with the CryEngine 3 pushing its limits to the next-generation, would these developers dare to make their sequel graphically inferior than their first game? No, they just lowered a few specs and physics in order to sustain itself on the consoles but they advanced everything else in lightning, spec particles, resolution, etc., and it inevitably turned out to look better on the 360. The CryEngine is the most powerful engine in existence, and if you argue with that, you're in utter denial.

EDIT: Yes, I've played all three versions on a VIZIO XVT3D424SV 42-Inch Full HD 3D Edge Lit Razor LED with Smart Dimming LCD HDTV 480 Hz SPS with VIZIO Internet Apps and I can fully attest that, for consoles, Crysis 2 looks superior on the 360.

I can also attest though, that my Battalion 101 X8100-U3 rendered into my TV is the most gorgeous thing your eyes will ever lay eyes upon. Once the DX11 update comes, it'll be even more gorgeous.

Also, why wouldn't I play the expert? Fanboys are play their roles, so I'll play truth and facts.

@TouchTheCloud you're only referring to the first Crysis (which was literally and mechanically proven to behold the best graphics on any sort of software) but you didn't compare Crysis 2 to Killzone 3, which is the conflict you have mentioned. CryEngine 3 was almost a downgrade of CryEngine 2 because 3 was built for a foundation of all platforms, not just powerhouse pc's (which some whose graphics cards still burned due to the sheer power of the graphics). Therefore comparing both CONSOLE games, I'd say Crysis 2 and Killzone 3 are about the same level of grpahics and even gameplay. Crysis 2 has sharper imaging and contrast and better lighting, whereas Killzone 3 barely has pop-in and almost all backgrounds look pre-rendered. Both are fast-paced shooters, Crysis 2 with the faster and more bionic motions of camera angles and character, and Killzone 3 with a realistically portayed weight system to the camera movement as well as character. Both are a 10 in my book.

wow, it seems like the people bitchin' are the ps3 owners. shut up and play the damn game already, enough with all this fanboy nonsense. i own an xbox and a ps3 and i bought this for xbox, not because the graphics are supposedly better, but because xbox has a better controller for fps's and xbln is much better then psn. not only that, as an american i support the xbox over the japanese ps3. just stop and think about that for a second. america makes better games, end of story. have some freaking pride in that.

I think this article is in bad taste and have no idea why this poor review (out of so many) has whipped up such a storm.

...the review post no real insight into the game whatsoever, it read no better then an assumption you could make from watching a trailer or two. Also, the multiplayer portion was tiny and shared nothing but a couple of COD comparisons.

Instead of writing this shameful article you should just learn from the experience and make sure you address what your viewers want to read about in the future. Don't make your lazy journalism our fault

It's good to see a reviewer defending their take on a game against all the shit you guys encounter. Must be fucking annoying having all these snot-nosed, pubescent assholes spewing their infuriatingly uninformed criticisms all over the comment section. However it does seem pretty unnecessary, the fact that half of your answers were just 'look closer at the stuff I've written' shows that you needn't pander to these retards, just let them boil in their own ignorant frustration.

I play this on PC at 1080p resolution, runs and looks great at max settings, even without DX11 (can't seem to see the difference and assuming 90% of people would not either, although many would claim they do...). The game spacing imo is fine, I didn't play it in hard/hardest difficulty (played normal) and tbh it's not that hard of a game. Most check points are like 1-2min b4 a major fight anyways. I think they made the checkpoints longer is that you can approach spots differently versus sticking with the one you initially planned and failed at.

lonefirewarrior: xbox fanboy? also its been proven that ps3 is a more powerful syestem. Now i'm not talking to ign guys. I'm talking to lonefirewarrior and dude you got to think what game company were talking about because i think we all know how many times micros*** payed people to make it better on their precious 360

That guy who said that IGN should leave out their personal opinions is a retard. Reviews are opinions. You don't have to listen to the critic. Just buy the game yourself. It's not like their telling you what to buy. They're just giving you a deep description of what the game has to offer.

IGN, you should take the "sticks and stones" stance towards these comments. You're doing your job. If readers don't like it, they should go somewhere else to get their game information on. I know that a review is one person's professional opinion, so I have to take that with a grain of salt or sand or cocaine. Whatever the kids are doin these days. Keep doing what you're doing except feeding the trolls. Keep them locked in the dungeon where they belong.

"Reviews are opinions and they won't always agree with one another. While I wasn't the only person at IGN to express the opinion that Crysis 2 on Xbox 360 is the best looking game on consoles, I'll be happy to elaborate why. The environments are very large. They're lit in real time by numerous light sources that are often moving across said very large environments (the Ceph mortar strikes during the Unsafe Haven level are a great example of this). The depth of field effects and bokeh are way ahead of anything anyone else is doing. The motion blur looks great, the textures are sharp. All of those things combined result in a game that for Xbox 360 is, in my opinion and the opinions of a number of other IGN editors, the best looking game on consoles. "

Funny how Lense of Truth has more then written word indicating that this is not true. According to ACTUAL FOOTAGE, the PS3 version shines in just about every element you mentioned. Just because you say that "number of other IGN" editors say something is fact, does not make it fact, particularly when these people are all under the same umbrella. Crysis isn't even the best looking game on the 360, to be honest, least of all on a console.

Haha I love it when websites get a chance to strike back at the ignorant cesspools of filth that are the comment sections. Yeah, you kids are allowed to have opinions (albeit retard, ignorant, biased and uninformed opinions), but let's try to make them less stupid from now on. No? Well, whatever, in the grand scheme of things nobody cares what you think.

agreed lol. its sad to see such disrespect and lack of intelligence. plus you but figure most of the comments were probably made by 12 to 16 year olds who had to get their mommy to buy the game for them. prob be best if they shut their fat ass up and shove a Twinkie in their mouths lol.

I think IGN does a great job of reviewing games. Much better then GameInformer does. Games like Dead Rising 2 got a 9.5 in gameinformer and got an 8.0 here. MUCH more realistic that game was good but nowhere near perfect.

crysis 2's checkpoints were BRUTALLY far apart when you got to the final parts of the game on soldier difficulty. You would have to go through 3 or 4 big firefights before you got one. And if you didn't go the exact way you needed to go the checkpoint never triggered. completely agree with arthur's review.

I would agree these people's comments were pretty crappy. anyways good article, keep up the great reviews!!